SHSelfHostIndex

Camunda Platform 7 vs Conductor OSS

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
CA Camunda Platform 7 BPMN-based workflow and decision automation engine VS CO Conductor OSS Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
FeatureCamunda Platform 7Conductor OSS
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageJavaJava
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM1,024 MB2,048 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, kubernetes, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 4,269★ 32,066
First released20132016
ReplacesMicrosoft Power Automate, AWS Step FunctionsAWS Step Functions, Camunda

Why pick each one

Choose Camunda Platform 7 if…

  • Strong BPMN standards support
  • Mature ecosystem
Camunda Platform 7 details

Choose Conductor OSS if…

  • Battle-tested at scale
  • Language-agnostic workers
Conductor OSS details

Frequently asked questions

Is Camunda Platform 7 or Conductor OSS better?

Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Camunda Platform 7 and Conductor OSS free and open-source?

Yes. Camunda Platform 7 is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Conductor OSS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Camunda Platform 7 and Conductor OSS with Docker?

Camunda Platform 7: yes. Conductor OSS: yes.

Related comparisons